Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 329 posts

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#201

Post by glef »

wodenokoto wrote: post #128
blowski wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly, why is the choice between no function or a crappy function? Why would every FM radio app necessarily be crappy? Secondly, why would it be useless when millions of people still listen to FM radio? In the UK for example, according to RAJAR (the UK radio body) 56% of radio listeners use FM compared to DAB or internet, which is around 26 million people. Thirdly, why does the hardware have an FM receiver at all i…

Making it good would make it more expensive than the returns you can expect. If it is possible to make it good, as the antenna is largely out of control. Fm is not useless, but bad Fm is. The third question is silly. Who's side are you arguing? The chip is there because it's more expensive not to have it. It's not like Apple adds Fm so they can laugh at the feature you almost had. It won't allow you to listen To BBC.…

I have a Moto G 3rd generation, with FM radio enabled. Works like a charm, and it's not the most expensive phone around.

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#202

Post by fivesigma »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #152
frigo_1337 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question: Why? I don't understand why people inherently dislike Javascript (aside from, y'know, creepy ad networks).

Because, besides the creepy ad networks and stuff, it's most often used in a mix of shitty engineering and user-hostile practices. Let's consider a web document like this article here. Its stated goal is to be read by the visitor and thus deliver him value. So presumably, an article that's easier to read is better than one harder to read. An article that, ceteris paribus, consumes less resources on user end is better…

Agreed.

JS on a website that is otherwise not an app has its use cases ie. tabulated data, search, filtering, realtime data etc.

But a static website displaying a simple article has no fucking business running any code other than HTML/CSS on my computer.

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#203

Post by tgarma1234 »

Aaargh20318 wrote: post #87
WalterBright wrote: post #19

I just bought an internet radio for my stereo (yes, I'm that old, I have a stereo). I was surprised to discover it also had a wire in the box that turned out to be an FM antenna. I thought with internet radio, who needs an FM tuner? (all the local stations have streaming URLs) Turns out I actually like it. It's handy when the internet fails, or when you're nearing data caps, or just want to run it all day without int…

> It's handy when the internet fails, or when you're nearing data caps, or just want to run it all day without interfering with download speeds So basically it's useful if you have really shitty internet.

I have AT&T and to be honest I would rather listen to NPR on the radio rather than streaming/using my data. My data rolls over. So wasting it on something I could get for free anyway doesn't seem fair.

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#204

Post by Larrikin »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #4
siddboots wrote: post #2

What's going on with Wired? This page has an autoplay video ad below the article text and an anti-AdBlock full-screen subscription nagger that pops up a few seconds after page load.

Part of their war on adblockers. In the past the adblocker nag has popped after you scroll down, well an autoplay video will get you scrolling to find out where it is and blam they pop the adblocker. Of course none of that happens if you hit 'reader view' in Firefox, nice easy to read article. Its one of the reasons I've stopped reading Fortune and Wired web articles.

Don't all of the major videos have mute buttons on the tabs. Firefox has had it for a while now

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#205

Post by ahalam »

siddboots wrote: post #2

What's going on with Wired? This page has an autoplay video ad below the article text and an anti-AdBlock full-screen subscription nagger that pops up a few seconds after page load.

I figured that when publishers do that (autoplay) to you, you can respond back by blocking scripts for them.

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#206

Post by daphreak »

rplst8 wrote: post #185
WalterBright wrote: post #19

I just bought an internet radio for my stereo (yes, I'm that old, I have a stereo). I was surprised to discover it also had a wire in the box that turned out to be an FM antenna. I thought with internet radio, who needs an FM tuner? (all the local stations have streaming URLs) Turns out I actually like it. It's handy when the internet fails, or when you're nearing data caps, or just want to run it all day without int…

> I suppose long term FM is dead, but meanwhile it has its uses. If true, this is really unfortunate. I've written about this before, but FM is a really great technology, and in a lot of ways it's only suffering because of the content. The sound quality of digital "equivalents" (XM Radio, HD Radio, Internet Radio, etc.) doesn't even come close to a clear FM station. Not to mention there are millions of vintage radios…

HD Radio really grinds my gears. They hijacked the HD acronym for marketing: it stands for Hybrid Digital. As you mention the quality is not comparable when you have a strong analog FM signal.

On top of that the encoding is proprietary and one company holds the IP for the codecs. I can't believe the FCC allowed it to become a "standard".

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#207

Post by jon-wood »

LeoPanthera wrote: post #92
alsetmusic wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's strange to me to read a positive comment about terrestrial radio broadcast amid so many complaints about ad blocking on the web. I stopped listening to radio many years ago and now I have an irrational resentment when I hear car stereos blasting pointless, noisy ads at traffic stops. I always wonder what allows people to mentally tune them out rather than decreasing the volume until music resumes. This is in no…

It really depends what country you're in. In the UK, by far the most-listened-to FM stations are from the BBC, which are of course ad-free. Radio 1 (for younger people) and Radio 6 (for less-young people) are great places to listen to new music. And you can stream them over the web, for free, even if you're not British: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio

When the BBC have such a wide range of music stations I can never comprehend why commercial radio is still a thing, and still so popular here. I'm probably not the target market though, since I also get irritated at the way all radio stations have about 15 minutes of music per hour, and the rest is filler from some smug DJ pretending to be your friend, and people calling in because they've got no one better to talk to about their deathly dull morning.

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#208

Post by daphreak »

jrockway wrote: post #42

More interesting would be getting the weather radio signal (not on the FM broadcast band, it's AM around 160MHz), and having the phone change which SAME code it's sensitive to as you move around. I know you are supposed to get an SMS or something whenever there is a severe weather event, but after a million amber alerts and a flood warning a few states away, that's the first thing I turn off when I get a new phone. I…

I would also like to be able to receive these stations. Especially when hiking or otherwise in an remote area with no cell service.

Minor nitpick, its a narrow band FM signal around 160MHz not AM.

Re: Your Phone Has an FM Chip. So Why Can’t You Listen to the Radio?

#210

Post by imtringued »

angersock wrote: post #148
frigo_1337 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question: Why? I don't understand why people inherently dislike Javascript (aside from, y'know, creepy ad networks).

I recently found d a stash of web pages I had saved locally over a decade ago. They still load...a modern one wouldn't.

You should create screenshots instead.
Post reply on HN